The High Court allowed the bail application of the applicant Rajendra Yadav on grounds of parity with his co-accused who was already released. The court did not express an opinion on the merits of the case, relying on Article 21 and a Supreme Court precedent.
Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12304 of 2022
Applicant :- Rajendra Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Rajendra Yadav, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 170 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C, Police StationJeanpur, District- Azamgarh during pendency of trial.
The co-accused, Bal Karan @ Sadhu Yadav, has been enlarged on bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.15010 of 2022. The prayer for release of the applicant on bail on the ground of parity has been made. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.01.2022.
Considering the fact that the identically placed co-accused has already been released on bail by this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that it is a fit case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant.
Having considered the material on record, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and
the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 27.7.2022 SS
Digitally signed by SURENDAR SINGH NARANG Date: 2022.07.27 17:45:57 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a bail application prayed on the ground of parity, considering the identically placed co-accused has already been released, is a fit case for bail.
Whether the applicant can be released on bail without expressing opinion on the merits of the case under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
What conditions are necessary when releasing an applicant on bail via parity consideration.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram SinghReferred¶11
Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
5 provisions across 1 enactments
Rajendra Yadav
State of U.P.
Siddharth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
